Newest Articles

Jun 2, 2026

Maine Supreme Court: Massachusetts Law Strips Staffing Client of Workers’ Compensation Immunity

Court Applies Massachusetts Law to Maine Injury, Rejects Immunity Defense in Multi-State Staffing Arrangement A New Hampshire contractor that likely would have enjoyed workers’ compensation immunity under Maine law lost...

Maine Supreme Court: Massachusetts Law Strips Staffing Client of Workers’ Compensation Immunity Maine Supreme Court: Massachusetts Law Strips Staffing Client of Workers’ Compensation Immunity
Jun 1, 2026

NY High Court Holds JIWA Bars Collateral Estoppel Effect of Pre-Enactment Workers’ Comp Decisions

New York’s Court of Appeals recently affirmed an Appellate Division order blocking defendants in a personal injury action from using a Workers’ Compensation Board causation determination as collateral estoppel, holding...

NY High Court Holds JIWA Bars Collateral Estoppel Effect of Pre-Enactment Workers’ Comp Decisions NY High Court Holds JIWA Bars Collateral Estoppel Effect of Pre-Enactment Workers’ Comp Decisions
May 27, 2026

Nebraska Supreme Court Affirms Denial of Death Benefits Where Work Injury Delayed Cancer Treatment

In a case involving a Nebraska truck driver-farm laborer whose treatment for metastatic cancer was allegedly postponed by complications associated with a compensable hip injury and its resulting treatment, the...

Nebraska Supreme Court Affirms Denial of Death Benefits Where Work Injury Delayed Cancer Treatment Nebraska Supreme Court Affirms Denial of Death Benefits Where Work Injury Delayed Cancer Treatment
May 26, 2026

NC Court of Appeals: Exclusivity Doctrine Bars Negligence Suit Following Workplace Stroke

A North Carolina district manager who suffered a stroke while preparing for the opening of a restaurant location—and who allegedly waited hours before coworkers summoned emergency assistance—may not pursue negligence...

NC Court of Appeals: Exclusivity Doctrine Bars Negligence Suit Following Workplace Stroke NC Court of Appeals: Exclusivity Doctrine Bars Negligence Suit Following Workplace Stroke

All Articles

ARCHIVE
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
Apr 21, 2012

The Fight Against Workers’ Compensation Fraud Takes Many Forms–Florida Goes After Unscrupulous Check Cashing Firms

In August 2007, the Supreme Court of Florida ordered the empanelment of a statewide grand jury to investigate various criminal offenses, including activities related to check cashers. In 2008, the...

The Fight Against Workers’ Compensation Fraud Takes Many Forms–Florida Goes After Unscrupulous Check Cashing Firms The Fight Against Workers’ Compensation Fraud Takes Many Forms–Florida Goes After Unscrupulous Check Cashing Firms
Apr 18, 2012

Virginia Court Affirms Denial of Benefits Related to Unexplained Fall In Spite of Evidence That Claimant’s Step From Truck Was Larger Than Normal Staircase Distance

In yesterday’s post, I pointed out the difficulty courts (and not a few practitioners) have had with a specific form of neutral risk–those in which an employee falls while walking...

Virginia Court Affirms Denial of Benefits Related to Unexplained Fall In Spite of Evidence That Claimant’s Step From Truck Was Larger Than Normal Staircase Distance Virginia Court Affirms Denial of Benefits Related to Unexplained Fall In Spite of Evidence That Claimant’s Step From Truck Was Larger Than Normal Staircase Distance
Apr 17, 2012

North Dakota Supreme Court Refuses to Adopt Positional Risk Doctrine in Unexplained Fall Cases

There’s nothing like an employee’s unexplained fall while walking on a level, unobstructed floor to test one’s position on the positional risk doctrine in workers’ compensation claims. As was noted...

North Dakota Supreme Court Refuses to Adopt Positional Risk Doctrine in Unexplained Fall Cases North Dakota Supreme Court Refuses to Adopt Positional Risk Doctrine in Unexplained Fall Cases
Apr 16, 2012

Divided Sixth Circuit Court Delivers Body Blow to Michigan’s Continuing Battle Regarding RICO Claims and Comp Exclusivity

by Thomas A. Robinson A divided Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, in Brown v. Cassens Transp. Co., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 6929 (6th Cir. Apr. 6, 2012), has again reversed...

Divided Sixth Circuit Court Delivers Body Blow to Michigan’s Continuing Battle Regarding RICO Claims and Comp Exclusivity Divided Sixth Circuit Court Delivers Body Blow to Michigan’s Continuing Battle Regarding RICO Claims and Comp Exclusivity
Apr 13, 2012

Ohio: Employer’s Failure to Call Employee Back to Work Was Due to Poor Economy, Not Retaliatory Motive for the Filing of a Comp Claim

An Ohio appellate court, in Lebron v. A&A Safety, Inc., 2012 Ohio 1637, 2012 Ohio App. LEXIS 1435 (Apr. 12, 2012), recently affirmed a trial court’s summary judgment order favoring...

Ohio: Employer’s Failure to Call Employee Back to Work Was Due to Poor Economy, Not Retaliatory Motive for the Filing of a Comp Claim Ohio: Employer’s Failure to Call Employee Back to Work Was Due to Poor Economy, Not Retaliatory Motive for the Filing of a Comp Claim
Apr 6, 2012

Spouse’s “Aggressive Surveillance” Cause of Action May Proceed Against Third-Party Administrator

Generally speaking, the insurance carrier (and any third-party administrator representing the carrier), while performing its proper role in the workers compensation claims process, shares the employer’s immunity to suit by...

Spouse’s “Aggressive Surveillance” Cause of Action May Proceed Against Third-Party Administrator Spouse’s “Aggressive Surveillance” Cause of Action May Proceed Against Third-Party Administrator
Apr 5, 2012

Ohio: Trauma Induced Stroke Sustained In Fall From Wheelchair Is Not Compensable Aggravation of Original Injury

A worker, who lost the use of his legs in 1965 in a work-related accident, and who was thereafter confined to a wheelchair, is not entitled to additional workers compensation...

Ohio: Trauma Induced Stroke Sustained In Fall From Wheelchair Is Not Compensable Aggravation of Original Injury Ohio: Trauma Induced Stroke Sustained In Fall From Wheelchair Is Not Compensable Aggravation of Original Injury
Apr 1, 2012

1st Circuit: “Persistence” On the Part of Injured Employee’s Attorney Results in Attorney Being Sanctioned With Almost $35,000 in Attorney’s Fees

The First Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed sanctions in the form of $34,908.12 in attorney’s fees against a Massachusetts attorney representing a plaintiff in a civil suit filed against...

1st Circuit: “Persistence” On the Part of Injured Employee’s Attorney Results in Attorney Being Sanctioned With Almost $35,000 in Attorney’s Fees 1st Circuit: “Persistence” On the Part of Injured Employee’s Attorney Results in Attorney Being Sanctioned With Almost $35,000 in Attorney’s Fees
Mar 28, 2012

Indiana: After Approval of Settlement Agreement By Board, Estate of Deceased Worker May Not Proceed Against “Employer” in Tort On Basis of Claimed Status as Independent Contractor

Because settlement agreements ordinarily cover only those claims or rights that are specifically mentioned within the four corners of the agreement itself [see Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 132.05], attention...

Indiana: After Approval of Settlement Agreement By Board, Estate of Deceased Worker May Not Proceed Against “Employer” in Tort On Basis of Claimed Status as Independent Contractor Indiana: After Approval of Settlement Agreement By Board, Estate of Deceased Worker May Not Proceed Against “Employer” in Tort On Basis of Claimed Status as Independent Contractor
Mar 23, 2012

Employer Gets Lesson in Law of Negotiable Instruments–It Remains Liable When Claimant’s Settlement Check is Misdelivered and Forged

An employer, who mailed a $17,000 settlement check to the address erroneously designated by the claimant in a Compromise & Release Agreement (C&R) settling claimant’s workers’ compensation case, is still...

Employer Gets Lesson in Law of Negotiable Instruments–It Remains Liable When Claimant’s Settlement Check is Misdelivered and Forged Employer Gets Lesson in Law of Negotiable Instruments–It Remains Liable When Claimant’s Settlement Check is Misdelivered and Forged
Mar 16, 2012

Tennessee: Employee Denied Benefits for Unexplained Fall to Level Floor

In a recent case from Tennessee, Byrom v. Randstad N. Am., L.P., 2012 Tenn. LEXIS 152 (Mar. 8, 2012), a special appeals panel of the state supreme court affirmed a...

Tennessee: Employee Denied Benefits for Unexplained Fall to Level Floor Tennessee: Employee Denied Benefits for Unexplained Fall to Level Floor
Mar 8, 2012

Wyoming: High Court Finds Injured HVAC Worker Established “Odd Lot” Status”

Under the “odd-lot” doctrine, accepted in the vast majority of jurisdictions, total disability may be found in the case of workers who, while not altogether incapacitated for work, are so...

Wyoming: High Court Finds Injured HVAC Worker Established “Odd Lot” Status” Wyoming: High Court Finds Injured HVAC Worker Established “Odd Lot” Status”

New Comments

  • ramivou: They hid behind a flawed "reading" of this statute for a decade. I am glad the SC finally put an end to the misconception that it was a "first six months only" filing requirement, rather than an ongoing responsibility.
  • trob: Thanks for the query. New York's going and coming doctrine is similar to that in place in the majority of jurisdictions. That is to say that for employees with a fixed place of work and who are on a relatively consistent work schedule, the commute to and from the residence is outside the course and scope of the employment. Often overlooked is the fact that the employee must generally have a fixed ...
  • ramivou: Is coming and going covered in NY?
  • trob: Excellent question. My thought is that the employer was following what it assumed was the typical practice of seeking to protect its "subrogation" interest in state court; in virtually all jurisdictions, the state trial courts are where subrogation issues are litigated. What differed here, of course, was that it wasn't a standard subrogation case, i.e., the employee's work-related injury wasn't ca...
  • ramivou: Why didn't they file it with the state Commission instead?
  • Thomas A. Robinson: I suspect that ACME could seek contractual indemnity, as you note, either from the staffing agency or its carrier. The goal of the Board or agency generally is to see to the proper award of benefits for compensable injuries. Allowing the "aggrieved" parties to sort it out later is completely consistent with the overall theory of workers' compensation. Many thanks for the comment. Best wishes.
  • Barry Stinson: I wonder if Acme's insurer could seek contractural indemnity from Variety's insurer outside of the WC system.
  • Michael C. Duff: The conceptual distinction is between joint causation and presumptive single causation.
  • Thomas A. Robinson: Sorry, I don't/can't provide legal advice. Best wishes, however.
  • Ken Smith: What can I do when my attorney blows my case with an incomplete RB89